Now, more than ever, it is natural to assume that someday all our media will be accessed through a single source, the mythical black box. And this would remain a myth, if companies weren't pushing so hard to make it happen. All one has to do is look at the XBox One, a gaming console whose hardest pitched selling point upon being revealed at E3 was that it could be used for television and other media. This amusing video satirizes their seeming obsession with providing a multimedia experience over focusing on gaming, by cutting it down the instances that they mention "television", "tv", "sports", and "Call of Duty".
Meanwhile, look at the tablet computer, most predominantly the iPad. You can browse the internet, watch Netflix, listen to your music (or any number of streaming services), read the morning news releases or your favorite e-magazine, or even just play touch-controlled games on it.
Whether or not the consumer will use these all-encompassing devices for their media consumption or not is irrelevant; companies want to create the black box because that's what they think will sell. Furthermore, if they can become the sole gatekeeper between you and your desired content, they are then able to charge as much as they wish, or stuff as many advertisements into your experience as they can reasonably fit. It makes sense to try to develop the black box. It doesn't make sense for the consumer to latch onto it, if he knows what's good for himself and the market.
Tuesday, June 9, 2015
Piracy has become acceptable?
It's the digital era, and artists seem less willing to act as mouthpiece puppets for their recording labels. I remember a time that artists were coming out in droves against musical piracy, which is what I was originally going to talk about. Instead, I found many modern artists who supported (or at least, were willing to tolerate) the practice.
http://blog.midem.com/2010/01/exc/#.VXHCws9VhHw
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100524/0032549541.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091119/1634117011.shtml
It seems that musicians are taking the ideological stance, saying that music shouldn't be "about the money", or that they make more from touring than album sales anyway.
It seems that musicians are taking the ideological stance, saying that music shouldn't be "about the money", or that they make more from touring than album sales anyway.
Friday, May 22, 2015
Expanded Thoughts on the Use of Electronic Mediums for Tabletop Gaming
For my ethnography, I had chosen to study tabletop gaming communities. This makes sense, seeing as I am an avid gamer. Back at home, Metro Detroit Gamers used to (perhaps still does) run board gaming sessions at the local public library. These helped to cultivate further a love for tabletop gaming, as it exposed me to games outside the standard Monopoly or Risk fare. Eurogames like Settlers of Catan or Ticket to Ride. Deck-building games like Dominion. Nowadays, the mother of one of my high school friends manages a weekly meeting at the local laser tag's party room, which pulls in a solid group of people.
But my history isn't the focus of this post. My intent is to highlight the increasing availability of electronic means to play tabletop games. While it can't compare to the camaraderie the physical table, there is much to be said for online gaming. For many, it provides a cheaper/free alternative to purchasing a physical set of the game and playing. While the legality of such arrangements tends to be questionable, some methods of avoidance have cropped up. Some programs accommodate the latest expansion by censoring its card text or providing low resolution art until a certain date. Others just provide the engine, allowing the community to source the necessary materials.
In any case, the biggest change is that these services remove the need for travel, or even to have a core group of dedicated players. Now, one can advertise their search for fellow players, and engage them over the internet, instead of needing to trek for what could be upward of an hour for the local game store.
Electronic tabletop gaming will never be able to replace the experience, but it provides a suitable substitute for those who cannot get the real deal.
A few methods of playing tabletop games online:
http://roll20.net/ (RPGs)
http://www.octgn.net/ (Card games)
http://en.boardgamearena.com/ (Various board and card games)
http://berserk-games.com/tabletop-simulator/ (Physics engine that simulates the movement of cards and pieces.)
But my history isn't the focus of this post. My intent is to highlight the increasing availability of electronic means to play tabletop games. While it can't compare to the camaraderie the physical table, there is much to be said for online gaming. For many, it provides a cheaper/free alternative to purchasing a physical set of the game and playing. While the legality of such arrangements tends to be questionable, some methods of avoidance have cropped up. Some programs accommodate the latest expansion by censoring its card text or providing low resolution art until a certain date. Others just provide the engine, allowing the community to source the necessary materials.
In any case, the biggest change is that these services remove the need for travel, or even to have a core group of dedicated players. Now, one can advertise their search for fellow players, and engage them over the internet, instead of needing to trek for what could be upward of an hour for the local game store.
Electronic tabletop gaming will never be able to replace the experience, but it provides a suitable substitute for those who cannot get the real deal.
A few methods of playing tabletop games online:
http://roll20.net/ (RPGs)
http://www.octgn.net/ (Card games)
http://en.boardgamearena.com/ (Various board and card games)
http://berserk-games.com/tabletop-simulator/ (Physics engine that simulates the movement of cards and pieces.)
Thursday, May 21, 2015
Taking a look back: is Facebook really causing polarization?
A few weeks ago, I spotted a headline in one of the New York Times that the college offers: Facebook Finds Opposing Views Trickle Through. This was about a week after we had been discussing the "filter bubble", the idea that one's choices of sites and online contacts limits their exposure to ideas contrary to our own. This idea received the minimum of contest, to my memory. It would make sense for one's Facebook circles to be largely composed of those with similar political views as our own. However, the claim that they put forth is that it is the users themselves, not so much Facebooks arcane mechanisms, that cause the construction of this safe space from contrary opinion.
Of course, to take this study's claims at face value would be foolish. Given that it was Facebook itself that ran through its own data, which it is using to proactively defend its own reputation, the report is suspicious. This academic blog post by Christian Sandvig outlines the study's weaknesses rather well.
In any case, we are left with the same set of questions as when we first discussed this:
Of course, to take this study's claims at face value would be foolish. Given that it was Facebook itself that ran through its own data, which it is using to proactively defend its own reputation, the report is suspicious. This academic blog post by Christian Sandvig outlines the study's weaknesses rather well.
In any case, we are left with the same set of questions as when we first discussed this:
- Does the internet create safe spaces from the opinions of others?
- Do these isolated spaces cause radicalization of opinions?
- Given that this trend in media is seen as simple market behavior, could this simply be human nature?
- Similarly, how much of this issue is caused by conscious decision, as opposed to basic instinct?
- What other sites/mechanical forces are limiting our exposure to contrary information? Google/other search engines? Newsfeeds?
Friday, April 17, 2015
Media Convergence and the Freedom it Brings
Media convergence has had the wonderful side-effect of providing an outlet for the voice of "the common folk." Video hosting services, such as Youtube, allow us not only to watch these videos, but encourage us to make them. Indeed, as technology has developed, the barrier of entry has dropped rapidly. In the early days, you still needed a video camera, a couple wires, maybe even dedicated equipment, simply to get the footage onto your computer. From there, you would have to edit it together using a specialized program, before finally sending it to the website. Now, we have services like Vine, whose entire market is short footage with minimal editing; slices of human life. Where once we were simply the consumer, now, we are all producers as well. One of the best examples of this is collaborative websites. Anything from the group-drawing site Flockdraw, to Google Docs for synchronized document editing, to Plug.dj, a music site that allows you to get into a "room" and have everyone listening to the same video at once.
On the other hand, this rise in technology has also provided us with options. No longer do we rely on one company to sell us a radio, we can pick from any number of hardware, software, and website options. If I don't like Youtube, I can post to Vimeo. I can use Tumblr to blog instead of Google-owned Blogger. I can play mobile games on an Apple tablet, or one from Samsung, or even Microsoft.
Welcome to the 21st century, an era of media freedom. A time where the wall between the producer and consumer has collapsed almost entirely.
On the other hand, this rise in technology has also provided us with options. No longer do we rely on one company to sell us a radio, we can pick from any number of hardware, software, and website options. If I don't like Youtube, I can post to Vimeo. I can use Tumblr to blog instead of Google-owned Blogger. I can play mobile games on an Apple tablet, or one from Samsung, or even Microsoft.
Welcome to the 21st century, an era of media freedom. A time where the wall between the producer and consumer has collapsed almost entirely.
Jason Kottke's Thoughts on Blogging
Jason Kottke seems to be someone aware of the net culture of his era. He talks about how even though he followed a few weblogs, just about anyone could start up a site and call it that. To him, what you did with it was what defined your blog as something worth reading. For him, like many others, his blog drifts between topics as he wishes, although he broadly labels it as "a site about the liberal arts."
His blog, however, sounds to fit more within the traditional definition, a website that acted as a log of the sites you found interesting, along with some personal notes. Over time, he's noticed the shift in how he and others use blogs, in which many of his old communities have fractured and fallen apart. Notably, before he had so many followers, he used to share details of his personal life on his blog, perhaps in the same way that we use social media.
I find it amazing how integrated he is with is own blog. Updating it 10 to 12 times a day, regardless of if it's a whole post or just an additional link, seems to be a feat to me. Even moreso, that he's able to make a career of this. I appreciated his notes on how advertisers even affect content on even a subconscious level, not wanting to offend his financial supporters.
Finally, in the era of clickbait media and outrage culture, I find it necessary to highlight this particular section:
His blog, however, sounds to fit more within the traditional definition, a website that acted as a log of the sites you found interesting, along with some personal notes. Over time, he's noticed the shift in how he and others use blogs, in which many of his old communities have fractured and fallen apart. Notably, before he had so many followers, he used to share details of his personal life on his blog, perhaps in the same way that we use social media.
I find it amazing how integrated he is with is own blog. Updating it 10 to 12 times a day, regardless of if it's a whole post or just an additional link, seems to be a feat to me. Even moreso, that he's able to make a career of this. I appreciated his notes on how advertisers even affect content on even a subconscious level, not wanting to offend his financial supporters.
Finally, in the era of clickbait media and outrage culture, I find it necessary to highlight this particular section:
Do you ever write to deliberately provoke a reaction? Any tips on how to do that?I've probably done this in the past, but don't do it much anymore. Provoking reactions is not that hard; try not provoking someone who disagrees with your point of view, that's the real art.
Wednesday, April 1, 2015
Kittens
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)